If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Dont know whether you guys noticed it or not but fawad has also put on some muscles..... biceps and forearms are quite good in shape yesterday......... This guy is a must for test.... and looking at our odi side his inclusion in odi's wouldn't be a bad thing...... fitness is incredible...... wat a player... he would have played 100 odd tests fot india despite their batting heavy line up

Its great he have done that. I would suggest he put on some belly too as Inzamam seems to like guys with huge waists.

I think now constant whinging in media and threatening can help him get back. We thought Inzamam would be different, but its very clear now that Misbah has a strong influence on the selections.

As we witnessed yestetday he plays for himself rather than for team plus he is now 35 unofficialy. So no point considering him for any format.

Yes! We need the young Kamran Akmal and Hafeez to carry us forward. Are you the same guy who says Babar Azam also plays for himself? Well people even accused Tendulkar to play for himself so what chance does Fawad has to avoid such criticism.

I feel sad for Fawad, because Fawad's exact clones have played in the team for 18 years.

But, it's also a sad fact that players like Fawad, Malik etc. don't belong in the modern LOI game.

the idea that 'we already have' players 'like' fawad has always struck me as very very odd. a bit akin in
my mind to that old chestnut, 'do we really need another left arm pacer'?

well, you might, if he's a *better* left arm pacer.

fawad has played 38 ODIs so far and averages 40 + at SR 74. those stats are almost identical to
Inzi and only slightly worse than kumar sangakara, who had the same Ave and a SR of 78.

but they played odi's in another era, you will say.

well. to get it out of the way, let's start first let's compare him to what's 'already' available at home
(a peculiar kind of way of talking about selection when you think about it; if one selects on the basis
of a comparison of available talent, no player who has a reasonable number of international games
under their belt is ahead of the other in the queue. identifying a queue of successfully less desirable
contenders should be the *outcome* of the selection process, not the basis for it.)

now, sarfraz and malik and even babar are typically trotted out as examples of the kind of players that
we don't need more of. 'accumulators'

but what's a modern batsman, and how many of these are actually playing 'the modern game'? the
way some fans talk one would expect this fashionable creature, who undoubtedly has a power game
and can hit out when needed while also being a reliable constructor long innings, to be able to average
a SR of 100, preferably 120 SR.

In reality, and quite remarkably, the only player who plausibly comes close to this description that I
have come across is ABDV (SR 100) followed by de Kock (95) A modern legend like Kohli manages 90,
as does Amla, someone like Williamson 83. And these are the absolutely creme de la creme of the
'modern game.' True enough they can go faster than their ave SR when the conditions are right, but
so can many players.

This should settle the argument about Babar (SR 90, Ave 55) once and for all. Not surprisingly to some
of us, Sarfraz fares exceptionally well here too, with a SR of 88. Which, incidentally, means that he scores
faster on average than Chris Gayle. It is in other words absolutely criminal to play him at 6, behind a stroke making wonder like Hafeez (SR 75)

Now I haven't sat down and done a run down on the ave score and pace of scoring in ODI games in the past
five years, but it is my sense that 300 as average score still a very competitive mark. To get there you
don't need to go at more SR 100, on average. And there could plausibly be many paths to that kind of number.

The problem here is absolutely not an 'accumulator' like Babar or even Sarfraz, I'd take two more Babars
thank you very much. The problem is 1. a lack of big hitters with reasonable averages to play around
these accumulators, up front and in the tail. 2. players who can switch gears according to match situation,
ie being able to play two types of game. the problem of many pakistani batsmen is that they play 2 half
games, being unable to rotate effectively or hit out. fawad may not be this type but babar is 3. a selection/
management policy which makes half the team on any given day feel like they are batting to save their
place, rather than play according to the match situation.

Now could Fawad be one of these middle order accumulators? A SR of 74 is still a ways off someone
like Sarfraz. But it is not beyond question I think that he could up his game, if asked to perform a
certain role and given a real run. What was most impressive to me about last night's game was not
that he scored a century - that's done often enough in domestics - but the way he put his nose to the
grindstone when he felt that it was safe to switch gears. Between overs 28 and 49, facing 61 balls, he
played all of two dot balls and scored at a SR of 150+. There may be other contenders for that middle
spot, Haris among them, but with Malik getting on in years I'm not sure that Fawad is so many rungs
down the ladder.

It's about being able to accelerate at will, and especially against pace bowlers.

Those are the kind of tough situations you encounter against the top 4-5 ODI sides. And particularly in ICC events, you have to be able to hit opposition's pace bowlers at will, be able to chase 60 when 20-30 balls are required, etc.

Shoaib Malik and Fawad Alam, the same kind of bats, are duds against pace bowling and cannot accelerate at will. The former is showing that for the last 18 years.

The 'limited' factor comes into play. de Kock, AB, Kohli, Babar are not limited in striking the ball. Kane Williamson is not considered an excellent LOI bat. @Aman

Let alone Shoaib Malik or Fawad Alam.

If you only want to win against the least 2-3 ranked sides, bet it West Indies or Zimbabwe or Bangladesh, fine.

At the end of a stressful, depressing day, a dose of cricket is what can cheer us up.

It's about being able to accelerate at will, and especially against pace bowlers.

Those are the kind of tough situations you encounter against the top 4-5 ODI sides. And particularly in ICC events, you have to be able to hit opposition's pace bowlers at will, be able to chase 60 when 20-30 balls are required, etc.

Shoaib Malik and Fawad Alam, the same kind of bats, are duds against pace bowling and cannot accelerate at will. The former is showing that for the last 18 years.

The 'limited' factor comes into play. de Kock, AB, Kohli, Babar are not limited in striking the ball. Kane Williamson is not considered an excellent LOI bat. @Aman

Let alone Shoaib Malik or Fawad Alam.

If you only want to win against the least 2-3 ranked sides, bet it West Indies or Zimbabwe or Bangladesh, fine.

I think you are maybe falling victim to the perceptual fallacy I was talking about. We remember big hits
and forget all the dot balls that come before and in between them.

If it was only about accelerating at will then Afridi would have been the greatest ODI batsman
of all time.

The T20 game, let alone the 'modern' ODI game, very rarely sees anyone, whether a
player or a team, score at 60 of 20 balls. Just stop to think about it. That's 60 in a bit more
than 3 overs. A SR of 300%.

In reality, as you can tell from the averages of even the best players, very few batsmen can
go at full click over an innings. The question is, what were you doing before those last 20 balls?

What sets players like Kohli and Dhoni apart is that they get off the mark quickly, rotate well and
run aggressively, turning ones into 2. Most fundamentally, they have temperament, and that is what
also sets Fawad apart.

I am a but unsure why you so privilege pace, even as I know the customary Pakistani insecurity on that issue. Don't spinners also bowl in ODIs? Does it not matter to win in the Subcontinent?

And what do you mean by hitting pacers "at will". In the modern ODI game, if an opener can take one 4 an over off a pacer then get 2-4 runs in singles and doubles, they are golden. Again I think you are letting a certain image of the 'modern' game overtake reality.

In reality, there is space in any modern ODI team for a player who can be relied on to score big at SR 80-90.
Which is why it is extraordinary to hear people talk about Sarfraz as if he barely deserves to be in the
ODI side. He's the best after Babar. The problem is he bats much too low.

As for Williamson. He's ranked 9th in the world by the ICC. Ahead of Smith, Amla, Dhoni, Sharma,
Roy and Butler. He would saunter into any Pakistani ODI team ever.

I think you are maybe falling victim to the perceptual fallacy I was talking about. We remember big hits
and forget all the dot balls that come before and in between them.

If it was only about accelerating at will then Afridi would have been the greatest ODI batsman
of all time.

The T20 game, let alone the 'modern' ODI game, very rarely sees anyone, whether a
player or a team, score at 60 of 20 balls. Just stop to think about it. That's 60 in a bit more
than 3 overs. A SR of 300%.

In reality, as you can tell from the averages of even the best players, very few batsmen can
go at full click over an innings. The question is, what were you doing before those last 20 balls?

What sets players like Kohli and Dhoni apart is that they get off the mark quickly, rotate well and
run aggressively, turning ones into 2. Most fundamentally, they have temperament, and that is what
also sets Fawad apart.

I am a but unsure why you so privilege pace, even as I know the customary Pakistani insecurity on that issue. Don't spinners also bowl in ODIs? Does it not matter to win in the Subcontinent?

And what do you mean by hitting pacers "at will". In the modern ODI game, if an opener can take one 4 an over off a pacer then get 2-4 runs in singles and doubles, they are golden. Again I think you are letting a certain image of the 'modern' game overtake reality.

In reality, there is space in any modern ODI team for a player who can be relied on to score big at SR 80-90.
Which is why it is extraordinary to hear people talk about Sarfraz as if he barely deserves to be in the
ODI side. He's the best after Babar. The problem is he bats much too low.

As for Williamson. He's ranked 9th in the world by the ICC. Ahead of Smith, Amla, Dhoni, Sharma,
Roy and Butler. He would saunter into any Pakistani ODI team ever.

One of the better posts which nicely separates the perception from reality. Some posters here just go by the perception of heavy scoring and fail to scrutinize what actually happens in the middle order.

Yes it is important for us to get modern players, but the area of attention should be attacking openers and lower order power hitters, the middle order will do just about fine as per modern requirements. I agree that we may not be scoring 350+ on indian roads but that will be more due to lack of consistent attacking openers like Roy and no power hitters at the end.

One of the better posts which nicely separates the perception from reality. Some posters here just go by the perception of heavy scoring and fail to scrutinize what actually happens in the middle order.

Yes it is important for us to get modern players, but the area of attention should be attacking openers and lower order power hitters, the middle order will do just about fine as per modern requirements. I agree that we may not be scoring 350+ on indian roads but that will be more due to lack of consistent attacking openers like Roy and no power hitters at the end.

And still our batting from over number 10 to 40 is worst in the world , modern cricket does not allow the middle order batsmen to take as much time as possible. Gone are the days when you could score around 5 rpo from 11th to 40th over and get away with it. Not anymore.

I agree though that openers and late order is the problem but so is the middle order who play a lot of dot balls

There is no doubt that Fawad has been harshly treated, but he has also not done himself any favours by choosing the worst time to 'not' perform. Prior to the 2011 World Cup, in the gripping ODI series vs SA in the UAE, he cost Pakistan two matches with his one-dimensional batting. There was no way the selectors were going to consider him for the World Cup after that.

Prior to the 2015 World Cup, he was badly exposed by Australia in the UAE. The bowled into his body and he was fish out of his water. These were his scores:

7 (25)

20* (39) - Arguably the ugliest innings in history when it comes to the death overs of an ODI match. Even a club level batsman would have a better SR than 50 if he bats through the innings in the last 10 overs. It was embarrassing to watch.

0 (4)

After the 2015 World Cup, with Misbah and Younis out of the way, he was given another opportunity vs the Bangladesh and he was awful. Failed to put away 80 mph full tosses on the leg-side. He isn't a Limited Overs player and never will be. He doesn't solve any of our problems in the shorter formats and the likes of Malik and Sarfraz are superior to him. Both can rotate the strike like he does, but they have better ability to hit the big shots. However, he could have replaced Misbah in ODIs. He could do everything that the former did + convert his innings into a big score as well. It took him just two games in his comeback to register a hundred, something Misbah was never able to do. Nonetheless, Misbah isn't there in ODIs now and he has been replaced by Malik who is better.

However, he could have been a Test regular. For all his limitations, there is no doubt that he would have been prolific in the UAE/Asia. Perhaps more so than Azhar and Shafiq, but in my opinion, the ship has sailed now. He will be officially 32 this year and the selectors will probably feel that replacing Misbah and Younis with another 30+ player would be a backward move. It will be understandable if they give people like Amin and Haris preference over him.

Fawad Alam is one of Pakistan's worst selection blunders. The guy could have been a terrific test bat by now and in all honesty, he was pretty good as an ODI batsman too. With barely 30 matches he averaged 40 with a sr of 75. There was room and age for improvement.

There is no doubt that Fawad has been harshly treated, but he has also not done himself any favours by choosing the worst time to 'not' perform. Prior to the 2011 World Cup, in the gripping ODI series vs SA in the UAE, he cost Pakistan two matches with his one-dimensional batting. There was no way the selectors were going to consider him for the World Cup after that.

Prior to the 2015 World Cup, he was badly exposed by Australia in the UAE. The bowled into his body and he was fish out of his water. These were his scores:

7 (25)

20* (39) - Arguably the ugliest innings in history when it comes to the death overs of an ODI match. Even a club level batsman would have a better SR than 50 if he bats through the innings in the last 10 overs. It was embarrassing to watch.

0 (4)

After the 2015 World Cup, with Misbah and Younis out of the way, he was given another opportunity vs the Bangladesh and he was awful. Failed to put away 80 mph full tosses on the leg-side. He isn't a Limited Overs player and never will be. He doesn't solve any of our problems in the shorter formats and the likes of Malik and Sarfraz are superior to him. Both can rotate the strike like he does, but they have better ability to hit the big shots. However, he could have replaced Misbah in ODIs. He could do everything that the former did + convert his innings into a big score as well. It took him just two games in his comeback to register a hundred, something Misbah was never able to do. Nonetheless, Misbah isn't there in ODIs now and he has been replaced by Malik who is better.

However, he could have been a Test regular. For all his limitations, there is no doubt that he would have been prolific in the UAE/Asia. Perhaps more so than Azhar and Shafiq, but in my opinion, the ship has sailed now. He will be officially 32 this year and the selectors will probably feel that replacing Misbah and Younis with another 30+ player would be a backward move. It will be understandable if they give people like Amin and Haris preference over him.

Its not understandable.. one guy is hardly fit for International cricket,

The other has been tried in various innings in different positions since 2010 including the champions trophy, but failed to show any metal in his batting.. even Fawad has a better LOI record than him

There is no doubt that Fawad has been harshly treated, but he has also not done himself any favours by choosing the worst time to 'not' perform. Prior to the 2011 World Cup, in the gripping ODI series vs SA in the UAE, he cost Pakistan two matches with his one-dimensional batting. There was no way the selectors were going to consider him for the World Cup after that.

Prior to the 2015 World Cup, he was badly exposed by Australia in the UAE. The bowled into his body and he was fish out of his water. These were his scores:

7 (25)

20* (39) - Arguably the ugliest innings in history when it comes to the death overs of an ODI match. Even a club level batsman would have a better SR than 50 if he bats through the innings in the last 10 overs. It was embarrassing to watch.

0 (4)

After the 2015 World Cup, with Misbah and Younis out of the way, he was given another opportunity vs the Bangladesh and he was awful. Failed to put away 80 mph full tosses on the leg-side. He isn't a Limited Overs player and never will be. He doesn't solve any of our problems in the shorter formats and the likes of Malik and Sarfraz are superior to him. Both can rotate the strike like he does, but they have better ability to hit the big shots. However, he could have replaced Misbah in ODIs. He could do everything that the former did + convert his innings into a big score as well. It took him just two games in his comeback to register a hundred, something Misbah was never able to do. Nonetheless, Misbah isn't there in ODIs now and he has been replaced by Malik who is better.

However, he could have been a Test regular. For all his limitations, there is no doubt that he would have been prolific in the UAE/Asia. Perhaps more so than Azhar and Shafiq, but in my opinion, the ship has sailed now. He will be officially 32 this year and the selectors will probably feel that replacing Misbah and Younis with another 30+ player would be a backward move. It will be understandable if they give people like Amin and Haris preference over him.

You often work this theme that a player has embarrassed themselves. Younis in England comes to mind. But a bit of red herring if the point is to evaluate a player across his career dont you think? Can think of quite a few players who had troughs in form, embarrassing or not.

In SA he top scored in game with 59 not out, a match we narrowly lost, but we only got so far thanks to him. He then provided key support for Razzaqs blinder of a century with a 48, the second highest score. That was far from a bad series for him.

He had a miserable Aus tour. But the 20 he scored was the third highest score after the openers had fallen away for 60 each. No one else got into double figures, including Afridi and it wouldnt have matter if he has scored a 50. Aus chased us down in 43 overs.

I dont disagree that it is late in the game for him, but hes still got a few years on Malik, and looks fitter and more muscular than ever. The way he played in the last PC game was very heartening. Once the wickets started falling around him he made sure to score off all but 2 balls for 61 balls straight going at SR 150 and staying on until the last over. That is the kind of relentless accumulation you want in the middle overs. And precisely in so far as Malik is doing well now, it is worth remembering Malik himself seems to have gotten better with age, not worse.

There is no doubt that Fawad has been harshly treated, but he has also not done himself any favours by choosing the worst time to 'not' perform. Prior to the 2011 World Cup, in the gripping ODI series vs SA in the UAE, he cost Pakistan two matches with his one-dimensional batting. There was no way the selectors were going to consider him for the World Cup after that.

Prior to the 2015 World Cup, he was badly exposed by Australia in the UAE. The bowled into his body and he was fish out of his water. These were his scores:

7 (25)

20* (39) - Arguably the ugliest innings in history when it comes to the death overs of an ODI match. Even a club level batsman would have a better SR than 50 if he bats through the innings in the last 10 overs. It was embarrassing to watch.

0 (4)

After the 2015 World Cup, with Misbah and Younis out of the way, he was given another opportunity vs the Bangladesh and he was awful. Failed to put away 80 mph full tosses on the leg-side. He isn't a Limited Overs player and never will be. He doesn't solve any of our problems in the shorter formats and the likes of Malik and Sarfraz are superior to him. Both can rotate the strike like he does, but they have better ability to hit the big shots. However, he could have replaced Misbah in ODIs. He could do everything that the former did + convert his innings into a big score as well. It took him just two games in his comeback to register a hundred, something Misbah was never able to do. Nonetheless, Misbah isn't there in ODIs now and he has been replaced by Malik who is better.

However, he could have been a Test regular. For all his limitations, there is no doubt that he would have been prolific in the UAE/Asia. Perhaps more so than Azhar and Shafiq, but in my opinion, the ship has sailed now. He will be officially 32 this year and the selectors will probably feel that replacing Misbah and Younis with another 30+ player would be a backward move. It will be understandable if they give people like Amin and Haris preference over him.

I agree it wasn't his proudest moment and he should have done better. But putting it into a little context, Fawad was 2 (7) at the end of 39th over when Afridi joined him. From there on, Pakistan played 63 deliveries. Fawad faced 32 of those and scored 18 runs. The remaining 5 (Afridi, Wahab and the tail) faced 31 balls for 10 runs. Now this in no way is an excuse to defend Fawad, but it at least shows the context where Australians bowled very well and everyone struggled on that wicket. Even Afridi scored just 2 off 9 balls.

Yes, it wasnt a good innings by any means but it wasn't as bad as the scorecard suggests or how Ramiz was crying out it to be (Ramiz just needs a hint of whats going on and he will just keep exaggerating it to somehow complete his commentary stint).

I agree it wasn't his proudest moment and he should have done better. But putting it into a little context, Fawad was 2 (7) at the end of 39th over when Afridi joined him. From there on, Pakistan played 63 deliveries. Fawad faced 32 of those and scored 18 runs. The remaining 5 (Afridi, Wahab and the tail) faced 31 balls for 10 runs. Now this in no way is an excuse to defend Fawad, but it at least shows the context where Australians bowled very well and everyone struggled on that wicket. Even Afridi scored just 2 off 9 balls.

Yes, it wasnt a good innings by any means but it wasn't as bad as the scorecard suggests or how Ramiz was crying out it to be (Ramiz just needs a hint of whats going on and he will just keep exaggerating it to somehow complete his commentary stint).

With Fawad, it is a recurring them and we have seen numerous times that he takes too long to get some sort of impetus in his innings. To his credit, he makes up for it later on, but his innings have no worth unless he hogs 100+ deliveries.

Ending with a good strike rate and pacing the innings are two different things. He is simply not a good Limited Overs batsman, but if we want to sustain our mediocrity in the shorter formats, then he is more than welcome. Replacing mediocrity with mediocrity does not really help, so the argument that he is better than Shehzad and Hafeez doesn't hold much water because the outcome will still be the same. You will not win ODI and T20I matches in this era with Fawad type players.

With Fawad, it is a recurring them and we have seen numerous times that he takes too long to get some sort of impetus in his innings. To his credit, he makes up for it later on, but his innings have no worth unless he hogs 100+ deliveries.

Ending with a good strike rate and pacing the innings are two different things. He is simply not a good Limited Overs batsman, but if we want to sustain our mediocrity in the shorter formats, then he is more than welcome. Replacing mediocrity with mediocrity does not really help, so the argument that he is better than Shehzad and Hafeez doesn't hold much water because the outcome will still be the same. You will not win ODI and T20I matches in this era with Fawad type players.

Mostly agree, his selection in an ODI is questionable but following him and seeing his passion and hunger, I believe he will work his way out and look a part. The unfortunate thing is that this guy wasn't allowed to spend years under the tutelage of Younis and Misbah, it would have developed him immensely considering he is an eager and committed fellow. I would still want him to be given chance in ODIs, a series (4 or 5 games) will make it clear if he can hold his own on the international level, if not then we should move on to a better talent. But if you ask me to chose between Kamran, Shehzad, Hafeez, Shafiq or Azhar in an ODI, I will prefer Fawad 100 times out of 100.

You often work this theme that a player has embarrassed themselves. Younis in England comes to mind. But a bit of red herring if the point is to evaluate a player across his career dont you think? Can think of quite a few players who had troughs in form, embarrassing or not.

In SA he top scored in game with 59 not out, a match we narrowly lost, but we only got so far thanks to him. He then provided key support for Razzaqs blinder of a century with a 48, the second highest score. That was far from a bad series for him.

He had a miserable Aus tour. But the 20 he scored was the third highest score after the openers had fallen away for 60 each. No one else got into double figures, including Afridi and it wouldnt have matter if he has scored a 50. Aus chased us down in 43 overs.

I dont disagree that it is late in the game for him, but hes still got a few years on Malik, and looks fitter and more muscular than ever. The way he played in the last PC game was very heartening. Once the wickets started falling around him he made sure to score off all but 2 balls for 61 balls straight going at SR 150 and staying on until the last over. That is the kind of relentless accumulation you want in the middle overs. And precisely in so far as Malik is doing well now, it is worth remembering Malik himself seems to have gotten better with age, not worse.

He top scored in that chase vs SA, but unfortunately the players who play bigger roles in match losing efforts tend to be remembered more. Misbah also top scored in Mohali, but he is remembered as the biggest villain of that heartbreak. However, had Afridi or Razzaq or Umar played a blinder, we would have won and Misbah would have been remembered for his 'anchoring' that allowed the explosive players to launch, just like Imran is remembered for his innings in the 92 semifinal, even though his innings was as poor as Misbah's, but Inzamam, Miandad and Moin played blinders. Had PP and social media existed at that time, Imran would have been lambasted for his 'selfish' innings.

Fawad's 59* (67) was better than the rest, but we lost that match by 2 runs and Fawad failed to score a single boundary in the last 5 overs. In fact, the only reason why we reduced the target to single digit figures was because of Wahab's cameo.

As far as his 48 in that Razzaq game is concerned, it was a mediocre innings. He scratched around for 68 deliveries and the RRR went from 6 to 9 during his stay at the crease. He did not provide 'key support' to Razzaq, it was in fact Afridi whose cameo gave Pakistan a glimmer of hope from a pretty hopeless situation, but Fawad - who batted with both Afridi and Razzaq - continued to suffocate the innings and made life difficult for both of them. To claim that they would have not been able to play the type of innings that they did is great disservice to them, especially the latter, who played the innings of his life and literally single-handedly won the match in the last 5 overs. As we saw in the Imran and Misbah examples, two equally poor innings can be viewed differently in retrospect because of the performance of others. Fawad's innings was equally poor.

In the 5th ODI, he along with Younis and MoYo killed the match after the openers provided an excellent platform. Younis went to the World Cup because of seniority, and MoYo never played again. Fawad too, was rightfully sent home.

Yes he has his strengths and is no doubt good at rotating the strike, but he does not provide anything that will improve our ranking in ODI cricket. He is not an upgrade on any of our batsmen given his playing style, and even if he marginally is, it is not enough for us to compete with the best ODI sides in the world.

Mostly agree, his selection in an ODI is questionable but following him and seeing his passion and hunger, I believe he will work his way out and look a part. The unfortunate thing is that this guy wasn't allowed to spend years under the tutelage of Younis and Misbah, it would have developed him immensely considering he is an eager and committed fellow. I would still want him to be given chance in ODIs, a series (4 or 5 games) will make it clear if he can hold his own on the international level, if not then we should move on to a better talent. But if you ask me to chose between Kamran, Shehzad, Hafeez, Shafiq or Azhar in an ODI, I will prefer Fawad 100 times out of 100.

I beg to differ. At 32, I don't see how Fawad can reconstruct his playing style and do something that he has never been capable of doing. If he could, he would have done so already because he has been repeatedly dropped/axed for the same shortcomings. Even in his interview recently, he admitted that he doesn't have the shots, but he can accumulate runs through single and doubles and then get his SR into the 90+ SR eventually, if he gets to bat long enough. That sounds like every other batsman in the team.

Awfully Slow start, but the SR becomes acceptable if he bats for 30 overs. It should sound familiar, because it is exactly what Shehzad and Hafeez and Babar and Malik and Sarfraz do. Fawad adds nothing to the team, and there is no point in selecting him in ODIs.

There is no doubt that Fawad has been harshly treated, but he has also not done himself any favours by choosing the worst time to 'not' perform. Prior to the 2011 World Cup, in the gripping ODI series vs SA in the UAE, he cost Pakistan two matches with his one-dimensional batting. There was no way the selectors were going to consider him for the World Cup after that.

Prior to the 2015 World Cup, he was badly exposed by Australia in the UAE. The bowled into his body and he was fish out of his water. These were his scores:

7 (25)

20* (39) - Arguably the ugliest innings in history when it comes to the death overs of an ODI match. Even a club level batsman would have a better SR than 50 if he bats through the innings in the last 10 overs. It was embarrassing to watch.

0 (4)

After the 2015 World Cup, with Misbah and Younis out of the way, he was given another opportunity vs the Bangladesh and he was awful. Failed to put away 80 mph full tosses on the leg-side. He isn't a Limited Overs player and never will be. He doesn't solve any of our problems in the shorter formats and the likes of Malik and Sarfraz are superior to him. Both can rotate the strike like he does, but they have better ability to hit the big shots. However, he could have replaced Misbah in ODIs. He could do everything that the former did + convert his innings into a big score as well. It took him just two games in his comeback to register a hundred, something Misbah was never able to do. Nonetheless, Misbah isn't there in ODIs now and he has been replaced by Malik who is better.

However, he could have been a Test regular. For all his limitations, there is no doubt that he would have been prolific in the UAE/Asia. Perhaps more so than Azhar and Shafiq, but in my opinion, the ship has sailed now. He will be officially 32 this year and the selectors will probably feel that replacing Misbah and Younis with another 30+ player would be a backward move. It will be understandable if they give people like Amin and Haris preference over him.

Fawad failing in a couple of series over like 4 years does not matter when the like of Younis, Asad, Umar, and Sohaib (all middle order batsmen) have played countless matches with worst outcome. Heck, even Malik was a complete dud before his comeback in 2015.

Why is that it is always Fawad who gets dropped after a bad series? What were Hafeez's scores in Bangladesh? 4, 0, and 4?

How was he dropped before the 2015 WC when he averaged 69@77 in 2014? These stats were gold for a Pakistani middle order batsman.

Why was he made to bat at #6 against Bangladesh in all 3 matches? Why was his bowling not used?

You can twist facts and paint a different picture but it is laughable to even think that he did not deserve a place in a pathetic batting line up like Pakistan's.

Fawad averages 38 in England and 39 in Australia, has a 90 SR 50 at Perth in the same match where Pakistani Bradman Umar Akmal scored the same amount of runs at 66 SR. Has a 50 in England in a match in which TTFs like Akmals and Hafeez did not cross single digit scores. So, the excuse that he will fail outside Asia also does not hold weight.

He top scored in that chase vs SA, but unfortunately the players who play bigger roles in match losing efforts tend to be remembered more. Misbah also top scored in Mohali, but he is remembered as the biggest villain of that heartbreak. However, had Afridi or Razzaq or Umar played a blinder, we would have won and Misbah would have been remembered for his 'anchoring' that allowed the explosive players to launch, just like Imran is remembered for his innings in the 92 semifinal, even though his innings was as poor as Misbah's, but Inzamam, Miandad and Moin played blinders. Had PP and social media existed at that time, Imran would have been lambasted for his 'selfish' innings.

Fawad's 59* (67) was better than the rest, but we lost that match by 2 runs and Fawad failed to score a single boundary in the last 5 overs. In fact, the only reason why we reduced the target to single digit figures was because of Wahab's cameo.

As far as his 48 in that Razzaq game is concerned, it was a mediocre innings. He scratched around for 68 deliveries and the RRR went from 6 to 9 during his stay at the crease. He did not provide 'key support' to Razzaq, it was in fact Afridi whose cameo gave Pakistan a glimmer of hope from a pretty hopeless situation, but Fawad - who batted with both Afridi and Razzaq - continued to suffocate the innings and made life difficult for both of them. To claim that they would have not been able to play the type of innings that they did is great disservice to them, especially the latter, who played the innings of his life and literally single-handedly won the match in the last 5 overs. As we saw in the Imran and Misbah examples, two equally poor innings can be viewed differently in retrospect because of the performance of others. Fawad's innings was equally poor.

In the 5th ODI, he along with Younis and MoYo killed the match after the openers provided an excellent platform. Younis went to the World Cup because of seniority, and MoYo never played again. Fawad too, was rightfully sent home.

Yes he has his strengths and is no doubt good at rotating the strike, but he does not provide anything that will improve our ranking in ODI cricket. He is not an upgrade on any of our batsmen given his playing style, and even if he marginally is, it is not enough for us to compete with the best ODI sides in the world.

Dude, your expectation from Fawad are ridiculously high. You want him to construct his inning like Kohli, play the anchor role and then finish the game too. 90% of the batsman will fail to do so. That is why, each batsman in a team has a role. For example, Misbah was an anchor in 2015 WC and it was the responsibility of the likes of Akmal, Maqsood, and Afridi to provide the acceleration in the end which they failed to do so. Pakistan won in 1992 because Inzy, Moin, and Akram were not trash like current so-called sloggers.

When it is about Fawad, people come with all sort of ridiculous justifications. None is comparing him with Lara or Ponting or heck even Inzy. Please do the same sort of analysis for other TTFs and see how many big matches/series/tournaments Pakistan has lost due to their failure. Then, compare it with Fawad's and you will see how harshly he has been treated.

My argument is so simple that I don't even need to write at length about it. I was simply explaining why Fawad was dropped in the first place.

Has he been mistreated? Yes. Does he add anything new to the team now? No. Is he an improvement on Babar, Malik and Sarfraz? No, and even if he is, it is so marginal that it won't improve our chances of beating the top sides. It was in his presence that we lost to South Africa, Australia and England, just like we do in his absence.

Yes he should have played ODIs ahead of Shafiq and Younis and even Misbah, but I am not bothered about it because it wouldn't have helped us beat the top teams and improve our ranking. Even in Tests, although he would have been prolific, I'm struggling to think of any series whose outcome would have been altered by him presence. We are unbeaten in the UAE and have done well in SL too, and I really don't think he could have won us the the series in SA in 2013 and England and Australia in 2015 and 2016.

With all said and done, it is quite clear that Pakistan hasn't lost out on much by ignoring him, because he doesn't bring any new or unique skills to the team. The only person who has lost out on is Fawad himself, and that admittedly doesn't bother me much since it didn't impact the results of the team.

My argument is so simple that I don't even need to write at length about it. I was simply explaining why Fawad was dropped in the first place.

Has he been mistreated? Yes. Does he add anything new to the team now? No. Is he an improvement on Babar, Malik and Sarfraz? No, and even if he is, it is so marginal that it won't improve our chances of beating the top sides. It was in his presence that we lost to South Africa, Australia and England, just like we do in his absence.

Yes he should have played ODIs ahead of Shafiq and Younis and even Misbah, but I am not bothered about it because it wouldn't have helped us beat the top teams and improve our ranking. Even in Tests, although he would have been prolific, I'm struggling to think of any series whose outcome would have been altered by him presence. We are unbeaten in the UAE and have done well in SL too, and I really don't think he could have won us the the series in SA in 2013 and England and Australia in 2015 and 2016.

With all said and done, it is quite clear that Pakistan hasn't lost out on much by ignoring him, because he doesn't bring any new or unique skills to the team. The only person who has lost out on is Fawad himself, and that admittedly doesn't bother me much since it didn't impact the results of the team.

I think this thread is about how harshly Fawad has been treated and not about how much Pakistan has missed him.

You always try to maximize your chances of winning. Just because you do not have a Kohli or Devilliers in your team, that does not mean you won't play your best available options. Why even play then when you know you will lose?

Awfully Slow start, but the SR becomes acceptable if he bats for 30 overs. It should sound familiar, because it is exactly what Shehzad and Hafeez and Babar and Malik and Sarfraz do. Fawad adds nothing to the team, and there is no point in selecting him in ODIs.

Yet they are still in the team... the Test Team would be a good start, don't mean he should start playing t20s for us

Awfully Slow start, but the SR becomes acceptable if he bats for 30 overs. It should sound familiar, because it is exactly what Shehzad and Hafeez and Babar and Malik and Sarfraz do. Fawad adds nothing to the team, and there is no point in selecting him in ODIs.

Absolutely right.

But then, we have double standards of the people who claim how Malik is the undroppable and quality player in the team. Which isn't true. Fawad would've done better against sides Malik has a bit of failing.

Sarfraz and Babar are better than all the others though. Out of them, only Babar can whack pace.

At the end of a stressful, depressing day, a dose of cricket is what can cheer us up.

A very informative and nicely given interview. Some very interesting things I noticed (I have just watched half till now);

1. He has a lot of relatives who played cricket at least at first class level. It is strange this guy doesn't have the right connections to get selected. It is also admirable that he is having good men as his elders who keep him so focused. His attitude seems great.

2. There are definitely people around who are making sure he doesn't get into the team. It is very unclear who those guys are and why are they not letting him in. Fawad says he have heard things said against him with his own ears. Things were said at the top level like 'ye larka humare galay ki haddi bn gya hai, isko bahir nikalo' and making sure to drop him due to some unknown reasons.

3. He holds Younis in high regard and explains how he built his confidence. He takes out time to speak about Younis particularly. Now I know Mamoon does not like Younis much but there must be something Younis was doing right, every team mate has a special mention for him even if no such direct question is asked.

A very informative interview. There were more interesting points which I may have missed.

Even Shahryar Khan accepts that a lot of injustice is done against Fawad but its strange that he cannot do much about it. It makes it very intriguing to know who actually those guys are with so much influence.

Fawad is easily the most ill-treated player in Pakistan cricket. Players with lesser talent and far inferior domestic performances have been given a chance in the national team but there is always an excuse available to exclude him. Now I would have agreed with some of the comments above regarding his failures had he been given a fair chance or if we had the sort of batting bench strength that India does at the moment (each and every one of their senior bats is dispensable imo given the amazing young batting talent they have - Nair, Pandey, Mandeep, Unmukt, Ishan, Pant, Samson, Iyer, Vohra to name a few) but unfortunately we do not have that luxury.. However, if merit and numbers alone are the yardstick for national selection then there is no better candidate than him.

Another thing that irks me no end is our assumption that players like Fawad are unfit for ODIs. While I agree that LOI cricket has undergone a massive change in the last decade, I feel we blow this change out of proportion at times. Players with S/Rs of 75 still have a place in the team, if there are other world class players who can score above 100 and power hitters who can utilize the powerplays around them. Our issue is that the only remotely world class batsmen we have is Babar and there are no power hitters in the team. And this is not Fawad's mistake! He deserves to be in the team, even if he scores at 75 for at least he will provide some consistency in the middle order unlike Hafeez, U.Akmal, Maqsood etc who cant ever be depended upon in a crisis. Just because he can't hit sixes doesn't mean that we pick players with inferior techniques or mindless sloggers in his place. Moreover, he provides an extra bowling option and is an excellent fielder and the fittest cricketer in the country.

A very informative and nicely given interview. Some very interesting things I noticed (I have just watched half till now);

1. He has a lot of relatives who played cricket at least at first class level. It is strange this guy doesn't have the right connections to get selected. It is also admirable that he is having good men as his elders who keep him so focused. His attitude seems great.

2. There are definitely people around who are making sure he doesn't get into the team. It is very unclear who those guys are and why are they not letting him in. Fawad says he have heard things said against him with his own ears. Things were said at the top level like 'ye larka humare galay ki haddi bn gya hai, isko bahir nikalo' and making sure to drop him due to some unknown reasons.

3. He holds Younis in high regard and explains how he built his confidence. He takes out time to speak about Younis particularly. Now I know Mamoon does not like Younis much but there must be something Younis was doing right, every team mate has a special mention for him even if no such direct question is asked.

A very informative interview. There were more interesting points which I may have missed.

Did he say anything about Misbah? If he didn't, its clear where the problem lies then.. Misbah considers him a threat to his spot

Too late for Fawad sadly. By now he should've been a regular for about 4 years @ least and a senior in the side. I'd have expected him to be dropped in ODIs now after a decent career as an anchor for being unsuitable for the modern game, while breaking into the top 15 for tests, getting ready to play his 50th test.

Now tho, there's no point investing in him when there's Saud Shakeel, Haris Sohail or Umar Amin about.

Did he say anything about Misbah? If he didn't, its clear where the problem lies then.. Misbah considers him a threat to his spot

From what I saw, there was no mention of Misbah, even as a player or in any capacity. Rumours are that Misbah is the one holding him back but things get tricky when you realise Fawad even doesn't make it to the ODIs which Misbah has left since 2 years.

Its high time media starts asking questions and clarify the situation.

From what I saw, there was no mention of Misbah, even as a player or in any capacity. Rumours are that Misbah is the one holding him back but things get tricky when you realise Fawad even doesn't make it to the ODIs which Misbah has left since 2 years.

Its high time media starts asking questions and clarify the situation.

Fawad was not being considered long before Misbah came on board. I didn't see anyone blame past captains for non-selection? People would blame Misbah for starting WW3.

Too late for Fawad sadly. By now he should've been a regular for about 4 years @ least and a senior in the side. I'd have expected him to be dropped in ODIs now after a decent career as an anchor for being unsuitable for the modern game, while breaking into the top 15 for tests, getting ready to play his 50th test.

Now tho, there's no point investing in him when there's Saud Shakeel, Haris Sohail or Umar Amin about.

Too late? The guy is 31 not 45! You can select Asif Zakir, Zulfiqar Babar and Rafatullah Mohmand, play Hafeez, Malik, Misbah and Younis and Fawad is too old? Somehow that logic doesn't make sense to me. As for the modern game, I just can't see why we fail to make a distinction between T20s and ODIs. ODIs aren't all about hitting. You can get over 300 consistently without being aggressive throughout the innings. Players like Fawad still do have a role at 3 or 4 to anchor the innings. A 100 ball 75 is still as valuable as it was a few years ago. Modern cricket admittedly involves high scores but you don't need all of your batsmen to be power hitters to get there. I agree about investing in Saud Shakeel and Haris Sohail (don't rate Amin as highly, he is technically proficient but doesn't seem to have the temperament for international cricket) but that should not come at the cost of someone who has performed throughout his career and deserves another chance.

My argument is so simple that I don't even need to write at length about it. I was simply explaining why Fawad was dropped in the first place.

Has he been mistreated? Yes. Does he add anything new to the team now? No. Is he an improvement on Babar, Malik and Sarfraz? No, and even if he is, it is so marginal that it won't improve our chances of beating the top sides. It was in his presence that we lost to South Africa, Australia and England, just like we do in his absence.

Yes he should have played ODIs ahead of Shafiq and Younis and even Misbah, but I am not bothered about it because it wouldn't have helped us beat the top teams and improve our ranking. Even in Tests, although he would have been prolific, I'm struggling to think of any series whose outcome would have been altered by him presence. We are unbeaten in the UAE and have done well in SL too, and I really don't think he could have won us the the series in SA in 2013 and England and Australia in 2015 and 2016.

With all said and done, it is quite clear that Pakistan hasn't lost out on much by ignoring him, because he doesn't bring any new or unique skills to the team. The only person who has lost out on is Fawad himself, and that admittedly doesn't bother me much since it didn't impact the results of the team.

I don't quite know what to make of an argument like 'It was in his presence that we lost...' I am interested in Fawad as a player, not as a Woodoo talisman.

Whether one player can make a difference all by himself is not the question. Selection should be about selecting the best possible players, even if it is only a bit better.

If you follow the principle that the guy who averages 40 instead of 35 is a better option, all other things being equal, you come out with a better team.

Having said that I think the argument for Fawad has also always been about that unquantifiable quality that we may call grit, tenacity. It's what sets a YK
apart from a YY. It's why it is unfortunate that Aslam was dropped.

Fawad is the kind of player who hangs in there, something the Maliks and Hafeezs of this world have been notoriously incapable of. Even Sarfraz is more likely to score a breezy 50 then make sure to stay with the tail until the end.

Babar is not in the frame of comparison here because he is a different quality player. SR 90 Ave 55 in ODIs is Virat Kholi class, even without Kholi's ability to accelerate.

Of course I agree that one can construct an argument for why Fawad was dropped. The question is why other players who have performed much worse over longer periods of time are nevertheless there?

To argue that he is incapable of scoring fast is wrong; also, I think, the notion that he is a slow starter. He can be, if wickets are falling around him, and that has too often been the case in the Pakistani setup, but because he is able to rotate strike he can also get off the mark very quickly, much like Sarfraz.

And SR 90 is clearly not his ceiling, after over 28 he went at SR 150 quite effortlessly in the last domestic game, taking few chances. Again, one does not need to hit sixes to stay in that kind of range; the odd four and a few singles will do it nicely.

Even in the not successful SA tour that Mamoon brought up he scored between SR 70-88, which was always faster than most of the rest of the batting order. What that tells you is that he plays to the conditions, and while not the fastest will also not be the one who holds everyone else back.

Too late? The guy is 31 not 45! You can select Asif Zakir, Zulfiqar Babar and Rafatullah Mohmand, play Hafeez, Malik, Misbah and Younis and Fawad is too old? Somehow that logic doesn't make sense to me. As for the modern game, I just can't see why we fail to make a distinction between T20s and ODIs. ODIs aren't all about hitting. You can get over 300 consistently without being aggressive throughout the innings. Players like Fawad still do have a role at 3 or 4 to anchor the innings. A 100 ball 75 is still as valuable as it was a few years ago. Modern cricket admittedly involves high scores but you don't need all of your batsmen to be power hitters to get there. I agree about investing in Saud Shakeel and Haris Sohail (don't rate Amin as highly, he is technically proficient but doesn't seem to have the temperament for international cricket) but that should not come at the cost of someone who has performed throughout his career and deserves another chance.

From what I saw, there was no mention of Misbah, even as a player or in any capacity. Rumours are that Misbah is the one holding him back but things get tricky when you realise Fawad even doesn't make it to the ODIs which Misbah has left since 2 years.

Its high time media starts asking questions and clarify the situation.

Still think Misbah is a part of the decision (not his ODI omission) but definitely his Test Matches omission which Fawad truly merits a return in

Why youngsters would perform constantly if pcb would select the same failures again and again.
As per some journalists azhar and umar names are already decided for CT, whats the point of this tournament performances.

I don't quite know what to make of an argument like 'It was in his presence that we lost...' I am interested in Fawad as a player, not as a Woodoo talisman.

Whether one player can make a difference all by himself is not the question. Selection should be about selecting the best possible players, even if it is only a bit better.

If you follow the principle that the guy who averages 40 instead of 35 is a better option, all other things being equal, you come out with a better team.

Having said that I think the argument for Fawad has also always been about that unquantifiable quality that we may call grit, tenacity. It's what sets a YK
apart from a YY. It's why it is unfortunate that Aslam was dropped.

Fawad is the kind of player who hangs in there, something the Maliks and Hafeezs of this world have been notoriously incapable of. Even Sarfraz is more likely to score a breezy 50 then make sure to stay with the tail until the end.

Babar is not in the frame of comparison here because he is a different quality player. SR 90 Ave 55 in ODIs is Virat Kholi class, even without Kholi's ability to accelerate.

Of course I agree that one can construct an argument for why Fawad was dropped. The question is why other players who have performed much worse over longer periods of time are nevertheless there?

To argue that he is incapable of scoring fast is wrong; also, I think, the notion that he is a slow starter. He can be, if wickets are falling around him, and that has too often been the case in the Pakistani setup, but because he is able to rotate strike he can also get off the mark very quickly, much like Sarfraz.

And SR 90 is clearly not his ceiling, after over 28 he went at SR 150 quite effortlessly in the last domestic game, taking few chances. Again, one does not need to hit sixes to stay in that kind of range; the odd four and a few singles will do it nicely.

Even in the not successful SA tour that Mamoon brought up he scored between SR 70-88, which was always faster than most of the rest of the batting order. What that tells you is that he plays to the conditions, and while not the fastest will also not be the one who holds everyone else back.

Expect to read the same excuses, low SR, can't hit big, lost 2 ODIs in 4 years, despite others doing worse than Fawad and always finding a place on the team.

Even though he doesn't have a lot to show, he should've been persisted with in ODI's as well. He would've gotten to become a Rahane level batsmen. Especially given he can bowl pretty well and is easily the best fielder.

However, now I think we don't have time to waste on him in LOI's but should be selected for the Test squad.

Too late? The guy is 31 not 45! You can select Asif Zakir, Zulfiqar Babar and Rafatullah Mohmand, play Hafeez, Malik, Misbah and Younis and Fawad is too old? Somehow that logic doesn't make sense to me. As for the modern game, I just can't see why we fail to make a distinction between T20s and ODIs. ODIs aren't all about hitting. You can get over 300 consistently without being aggressive throughout the innings. Players like Fawad still do have a role at 3 or 4 to anchor the innings. A 100 ball 75 is still as valuable as it was a few years ago. Modern cricket admittedly involves high scores but you don't need all of your batsmen to be power hitters to get there. I agree about investing in Saud Shakeel and Haris Sohail (don't rate Amin as highly, he is technically proficient but doesn't seem to have the temperament for international cricket) but that should not come at the cost of someone who has performed throughout his career and deserves another chance.

I do not think the Pakistani way of seniority, lack of professionalism and living in the past. While I hate current Modern day ODIs due to poor quality and mediocrity, there's no doubt that ODIs now are just longer T20s. Players like Fawad yes they do have a role, especially when there's a slow and low pitch which you get every now and then however there's already Malik, Babar and Sarfraz in team Pakistan, all of whom are doing an equally capable job (if not better).

And if you think 300 is a winning score, you do not understand modern day ODIs then. What happened to Pakistan in the first (or second?) game vs Windies? They chased down Pakistans 300. Nowadays, a safe score is sadly 350 which while I think is ridiculous, is true.

Also, you can't use poor suggestions to justify and another poor suggestion. Asif, Zulfi and Rafawhatever are all mediocre old men. Misbah and Younis have set a poor example playing on till 40+ which is evident from Kamran Akmals moaning while Malik already covers the quota of a 35+ player. He too shouldn't really be there.

There should be no more than 1 35+ player (Malik) and 2 30+(Sarfraz and Malik). Mickey is doing it right by making the Pakistani team younger. I don't think there is any more players that are above age apart from MoHafeez who btw is probably the biggest plague in Pak cricket so am not gonna argue about him.

Yes Amin is a mental midget but he is a very suitable person for team Pakistan so there's no harm in giving him another go. He can open, can hit good strokes all round the wicket, can bowl some pace(which is highly needed) and is a left hander. While Haris/Saud need to be apart of a middle order which atm is dominated by right handers. Also Hussain Talat needs to be there too becoz he can match Amin, probably might be better too.

The Pakistani Team should be formed by players like Haris, Babar, Talat, Sharjeel(if he returns),Amin, Yamin, Shadab, Imad, Amir, Malik, Sarfraz,Hasan...

Fawad was not being considered long before Misbah came on board. I didn't see anyone blame past captains for non-selection? People would blame Misbah for starting WW3.

Corruption high up is the cause.

Well, I am afraid u r absolutely wrong with you said. 'Fawad was not being considered long before Misbah came on board'. Misbah's Test captaincy stint started in Oct-2010. Fawad's last test match was in Nov-2009. It is understandable if a player is dropped for a year and finding it hard to make a comeback, but it is absolutely not on that a player is not recalled even after piling tons of runs season after season. Now it must be a mighty coincidence that his non selection coincided with the whole of Misbah's tenure.

Misbah took over ODI captaincy in Apr 2011 and Fawad played his last game in late 2010. Fawad was given only 8 games during Misbah's tenure of which he at least played 3 innings which were pivotal to the team cause, such contributions doesnt warrant a drop on a couple of failures.

Well in any case I had been pro Misbah throughout his tenure but I must say that I have lost a lot of respect for him due to his mistreatment and favoritism to certain players.

And if you think 300 is a winning score, you do not understand modern day ODIs then. What happened to Pakistan in the first (or second?) game vs Windies? They chased down Pakistans 300. Nowadays, a safe score is sadly 350 which while I think is ridiculous, is true.

Well maybe you are right that I don't understand modern ODIs. But the match which you cited as evidence was not lost because of batting (well yes they couldn't score much in the last 10) but because of Pakistan's clueless bowling. The target was more than enough. A very simple search on cricinfo shows me that over the last one year 125 ODIs have been played and the average RPO has been 5.35 which translates into a score of 268 and 5.41 in the 215 matches played during the last two years (271). (Admittedly this is slightly skewed towards the lower side because of a lot of matches being played in Zimbabwe). So, no, 350 is by no means the par score these days, 300 might be so but not 350. That perception has more to do with the glut of T20s which makes us feel that anything less than 350 is undefendable. Moreover, Pakistan's failures are not just because of batting, our seam bowlers have been pretty ineffective eco rate of 5.79 (last 2 years) and 5.54 (last one year).

Also, you can't use poor suggestions to justify and another poor suggestion. Asif, Zulfi and Rafawhatever are all mediocre old men. Misbah and Younis have set a poor example playing on till 40+ which is evident from Kamran Akmals moaning while Malik already covers the quota of a 35+ player. He too shouldn't really be there.

There should be no more than 1 35+ player (Malik) and 2 30+(Sarfraz and Malik). Mickey is doing it right by making the Pakistani team younger. I don't think there is any more players that are above age apart from MoHafeez who btw is probably the biggest plague in Pak cricket so am not gonna argue about him.

Yes Amin is a mental midget but he is a very suitable person for team Pakistan so there's no harm in giving him another go. He can open, can hit good strokes all round the wicket, can bowl some pace(which is highly needed) and is a left hander. While Haris/Saud need to be apart of a middle order which atm is dominated by right handers. Also Hussain Talat needs to be there too becoz he can match Amin, probably might be better too.

The Pakistani Team should be formed by players like Haris, Babar, Talat, Sharjeel(if he returns),Amin, Yamin, Shadab, Imad, Amir, Malik, Sarfraz,Hasan...

Not justifying any poor selection, just saying that selectors should be consistent in their policies and shouldn't make baseless excuses like age to justify personal preferences and nepotism. As for the young old debate. Personally I'm sick and tired of it. My criteria is simple: pick the 11 best performing, fittest players regardless of age, domicile, religion, height, weight, facial hair, blah blah, none of those things matter one bit. But instead we are caught in a cycle where every year we claim to be focusing on the future, on preparing a team for a major tournament and then losing miserably and recalling all those discarded. Focusing on youth is important but it doesn't mean culling all experienced players.

As for Amin, i like the guy a lot for his technique and he does deserve a chance but just have a gut feeling that he will not amount to much in the long run.

Well maybe you are right that I don't understand modern ODIs. But the match which you cited as evidence was not lost because of batting (well yes they couldn't score much in the last 10) but because of Pakistan's clueless bowling. The target was more than enough. A very simple search on cricinfo shows me that over the last one year 125 ODIs have been played and the average RPO has been 5.35 which translates into a score of 268 and 5.41 in the 215 matches played during the last two years (271). (Admittedly this is slightly skewed towards the lower side because of a lot of matches being played in Zimbabwe). So, no, 350 is by no means the par score these days, 300 might be so but not 350. That perception has more to do with the glut of T20s which makes us feel that anything less than 350 is undefendable. Moreover, Pakistan's failures are not just because of batting, our seam bowlers have been pretty ineffective eco rate of 5.79 (last 2 years) and 5.54 (last one year).

Hmm yeah you've got a point. The problem is Pakistan has neither the bowling(fast bowlers) nor the batting right now to compete with the top teams. You get 350 pitches more often than those slow and low ones that people like Sarfraz or Malik (or fawad) would prosper on and that's why you need a lot of hacks who can clear the boundary. You're right in the sense that 90/100 sr plodders are worth much more than those hacks who come good in one game out of like 100 but players like Sharjeel are more consistent and are needed than plodders. 350 isn't par but it's the safe score nowadays, just a few years back 320 was a safe score but right now it gets chased down with ease.

Either Pakistan gets better bowlers or better Flat track bullys. I'd invest in batsmen considering bowler friendly wickets are very rare and the game is suited more to batsmen...

Hmm yeah you've got a point. The problem is Pakistan has neither the bowling(fast bowlers) nor the batting right now to compete with the top teams. You get 350 pitches more often than those slow and low ones that people like Sarfraz or Malik (or fawad) would prosper on and that's why you need a lot of hacks who can clear the boundary. You're right in the sense that 90/100 sr plodders are worth much more than those hacks who come good in one game out of like 100 but players like Sharjeel are more consistent and are needed than plodders. 350 isn't par but it's the safe score nowadays, just a few years back 320 was a safe score but right now it gets chased down with ease.

Either Pakistan gets better bowlers or better Flat track bullys. I'd invest in batsmen considering bowler friendly wickets are very rare and the game is suited more to batsmen...

Yeah man, there was a time when scoring 300 meant the match was more or less over. But at least there was greater balance between bat and ball. A team could just as likely win by dismissing the opposition by good bowling as by chasing down totals unlike today when you rarely win a match through aggressive bowling. Miss the 90s. Sigh. Haha.

I may be wrong but I would never go for hacks in ODIs. They have their place in T20s where a quick 25 is good enough but in ODIs they invariably get exposed by good bowlers. My argument for anchors like Fawad is very simple. Let's say you have 2 or 3 of them who score 90 in 20 overs @75 and then you have 2 world class players who make 120 at run a ball or less. That's 210 (+/- 20 runs depending on form, bowling, pitch and situation on that day) in 40 overs. And then get your powerhitters to get 70-100 in the remaining 10. That's around 300 runs without needing all out power hitting throughout the game. Again this is a very rough example but just to give an idea of what I was trying to get at - that innings need to be constructed in ODIs except on some days when everything just goes your way. But despite all this you will still need your bowlers to perform :p.

Regarding hitters, the quality that we have (Mukhtar, Awais, Shahzaib etc) is just not good enough and more often than not they are walking wickets against good sides. Even sharjeel wasn't reliable. If you HAVE to go with a hitter I'd rather get someone like Aamir Yamin and take a punt on him, for at least he gives an extra bowling option even if the experiment with the bat fails.

Should've been an automatic selection for test team for the longest of times but alas ... there's still hope yet after this WI series ... he MUST be one of the replacements for YK/Misbah as his ability to score daddy 100s in domestic will bode well for our home matches in UAE ... He's very much YK like in hunger for runs ... Inzi needs to finally address this injustice. I don't get how Salahuddin was sent ahead of Fawad.

Ideally Fawad would've become a mainstay well before Azhar & Shafiq debuted but we all know what happened.

Enough of this madness, time to select him for test team and give him a proper run. He deserves it after toiling for years in FC.

Could be a solid backup middle order option in ODIs as well. But for now, a selection in the test team is well past due.

the idea that 'we already have' players 'like' fawad has always struck me as very very odd. a bit akin in
my mind to that old chestnut, 'do we really need another left arm pacer'?

well, you might, if he's a *better* left arm pacer.

fawad has played 38 ODIs so far and averages 40 + at SR 74. those stats are almost identical to
Inzi and only slightly worse than kumar sangakara, who had the same Ave and a SR of 78.

but they played odi's in another era, you will say.

well. to get it out of the way, let's start first let's compare him to what's 'already' available at home
(a peculiar kind of way of talking about selection when you think about it; if one selects on the basis
of a comparison of available talent, no player who has a reasonable number of international games
under their belt is ahead of the other in the queue. identifying a queue of successfully less desirable
contenders should be the *outcome* of the selection process, not the basis for it.)

now, sarfraz and malik and even babar are typically trotted out as examples of the kind of players that
we don't need more of. 'accumulators'

but what's a modern batsman, and how many of these are actually playing 'the modern game'? the
way some fans talk one would expect this fashionable creature, who undoubtedly has a power game
and can hit out when needed while also being a reliable constructor long innings, to be able to average
a SR of 100, preferably 120 SR.

In reality, and quite remarkably, the only player who plausibly comes close to this description that I
have come across is ABDV (SR 100) followed by de Kock (95) A modern legend like Kohli manages 90,
as does Amla, someone like Williamson 83. And these are the absolutely creme de la creme of the
'modern game.' True enough they can go faster than their ave SR when the conditions are right, but
so can many players.

This should settle the argument about Babar (SR 90, Ave 55) once and for all. Not surprisingly to some
of us, Sarfraz fares exceptionally well here too, with a SR of 88. Which, incidentally, means that he scores
faster on average than Chris Gayle. It is in other words absolutely criminal to play him at 6, behind a stroke making wonder like Hafeez (SR 75)

Now I haven't sat down and done a run down on the ave score and pace of scoring in ODI games in the past
five years, but it is my sense that 300 as average score still a very competitive mark. To get there you
don't need to go at more SR 100, on average. And there could plausibly be many paths to that kind of number.

The problem here is absolutely not an 'accumulator' like Babar or even Sarfraz, I'd take two more Babars
thank you very much. The problem is 1. a lack of big hitters with reasonable averages to play around
these accumulators, up front and in the tail. 2. players who can switch gears according to match situation,
ie being able to play two types of game. the problem of many pakistani batsmen is that they play 2 half
games, being unable to rotate effectively or hit out. fawad may not be this type but babar is 3. a selection/
management policy which makes half the team on any given day feel like they are batting to save their
place, rather than play according to the match situation.

Now could Fawad be one of these middle order accumulators? A SR of 74 is still a ways off someone
like Sarfraz. But it is not beyond question I think that he could up his game, if asked to perform a
certain role and given a real run. What was most impressive to me about last night's game was not
that he scored a century - that's done often enough in domestics - but the way he put his nose to the
grindstone when he felt that it was safe to switch gears. Between overs 28 and 49, facing 61 balls, he
played all of two dot balls and scored at a SR of 150+. There may be other contenders for that middle
spot, Haris among them, but with Malik getting on in years I'm not sure that Fawad is so many rungs
down the ladder.

a test line up of azhar, shafiq, misbah, and fawad would literally make the opposition teams die of boredom. could and should have been tried here and there.

Fawad actually rotates the strike ... miles ahead of Azhar, Misbah and Shafiq in this regard ... that's his bread and butter and that's how he piles up the runs much like YK. Keeps the scoreboard ticking. He would be a breathe of fresh air in test line up because of this one skill alone which eludes many, many of our batsmen across all 3 formats.

That 168 vs SL was made at a SR of 65 while opening which was amazing given the match situation. His SR in 3 matches is 57 which would immediately improve the flow of runs compared to Azhar, Misbah and Shafiq's low to mid 40s.

Yeah man, there was a time when scoring 300 meant the match was more or less over. But at least there was greater balance between bat and ball. A team could just as likely win by dismissing the opposition by good bowling as by chasing down totals unlike today when you rarely win a match through aggressive bowling. Miss the 90s. Sigh. Haha.

I may be wrong but I would never go for hacks in ODIs. They have their place in T20s where a quick 25 is good enough but in ODIs they invariably get exposed by good bowlers. My argument for anchors like Fawad is very simple. Let's say you have 2 or 3 of them who score 90 in 20 overs @75 and then you have 2 world class players who make 120 at run a ball or less. That's 210 (+/- 20 runs depending on form, bowling, pitch and situation on that day) in 40 overs. And then get your powerhitters to get 70-100 in the remaining 10. That's around 300 runs without needing all out power hitting throughout the game. Again this is a very rough example but just to give an idea of what I was trying to get at - that innings need to be constructed in ODIs except on some days when everything just goes your way. But despite all this you will still need your bowlers to perform :p.

Regarding hitters, the quality that we have (Mukhtar, Awais, Shahzaib etc) is just not good enough and more often than not they are walking wickets against good sides. Even sharjeel wasn't reliable. If you HAVE to go with a hitter I'd rather get someone like Aamir Yamin and take a punt on him, for at least he gives an extra bowling option even if the experiment with the bat fails.

The flaw in your argument is that day captains who are tactically advanced (like the Aussies) will know that to expose plodders is by blocking their scoring areas and since they aren't capable of getting boundaries with ease, they get bogged down and end up skying. I'm sure this happened to Fawad in the Aus series in the UAE. If you have two 120+ sr individuals, you're good to go but atm there's not a single one in the Pak team.

While the 90s were high in quality, the 80s was probably the best era for cricketing and when it peaked the most, it probably won't be matched ever again sadly. Even the 00s was good and personally I think it was all well t ill post 2010.

The flaw in your argument is that day captains who are tactically advanced (like the Aussies) will know that to expose plodders is by blocking their scoring areas and since they aren't capable of getting boundaries with ease, they get bogged down and end up skying. I'm sure this happened to Fawad in the Aus series in the UAE. If you have two 120+ sr individuals, you're good to go but atm there's not a single one in the Pak team.

While the 90s were high in quality, the 80s was probably the best era for cricketing and when it peaked the most, it probably won't be matched ever again sadly. Even the 00s was good and personally I think it was all well t ill post 2010.

Agreed, but by that same logic they will also easily expose the hacks who are preferred over the likes of Fawad. In fact the supposed power hitters that we have are even easier to work out than Fawad. Players like Fawad rely on intelligence and innovation and are more likely to adapt to situations than players who only know one way of batting.

I doubt ANY team has 2 120+ world class players. That is just a misconception. One of the posts above refuted it very well. It's just T20 cricket messing with our brains.

Agreed, but by that same logic they will also easily expose the hacks who are preferred over the likes of Fawad. In fact the supposed power hitters that we have are even easier to work out than Fawad. Players like Fawad rely on intelligence and innovation and are more likely to adapt to situations than players who only know one way of batting.

I doubt ANY team has 2 120+ world class players. That is just a misconception. One of the posts above refuted it very well. It's just T20 cricket messing with our brains.

South Africa has Miller/AB, England has Buttler/Stokes, New Zealand have Corey/Elliot, India have ?? (they're overrated) and Australia as Maxwell/Marsh. Just because some of them have strike rates otherwise, with modern day ODIs these guys all can get 20 ball 50s and strike @ 180+, something the Pakistanis cannot.

Yeah you're right maybe hacks is the wrong word, maybe flat track bully is what I mean. A hack is someone like Awais Zia, a FTB is someone like Rohit Sharma or Guptill who are failures in tests due to poor techniques/mental strength but are among the best ODI openers in the world.

South Africa has Miller/AB, England has Buttler/Stokes, New Zealand have Corey/Elliot, India have ?? (they're overrated) and Australia as Maxwell/Marsh. Just because some of them have strike rates otherwise, with modern day ODIs these guys all can get 20 ball 50s and strike @ 180+, something the Pakistanis cannot.

Yeah you're right maybe hacks is the wrong word, maybe flat track bully is what I mean. A hack is someone like Awais Zia, a FTB is someone like Rohit Sharma or Guptill who are failures in tests due to poor techniques/mental strength but are among the best ODI openers in the world.

I think we were talking about world-class players who could score @100 consistently for long periods of time. Of those named above, barring AB the rest are hitters good for cameos and occasional big innings but not players who one can call world-class.

He has been biding his time smartly because he knows that once Misbah and YK retire, the team will need someone like him to provide stability in the middle. I really hope he gets a shot once the two senior statesmen are gone. I am not a huge fan nor his critic, I just think he does deserve another run in test team.

I think we were talking about world-class players who could score @100 consistently for long periods of time. Of those named above, barring AB the rest are hitters good for cameos and occasional big innings but not players who one can call world-class.

If the 2015 world cup is anything to go by, players like the ones I mentioned will all probably be striking at 120+. Here in England the pitches are pancakes, we have Buttler, Stokes, Hales, Mo all who can take full advantage while Pakistan has none. At All.

Awfully Slow start, but the SR becomes acceptable if he bats for 30 overs. It should sound familiar, because it is exactly what Shehzad and Hafeez and Babar and Malik and Sarfraz do. Fawad adds nothing to the team, and there is no point in selecting him in ODIs.

Why did you put Sarfraz' name in there? Care to explain? when did he start his innings slowly? Even once?

Why did you put Sarfraz' name in there? Care to explain? when did he start his innings slowly? Even once?

He often does, did it recently against WI in the UAE but finished very well. He is relatively better because his strike rotation is very good, but he too is not someone who can boundaries from the word go, which was the context of my post.

Yes today wasn't a good day, Run out when he got set wasn't the best way to go, but we all know that his chances were anyway slim to get into the ODI team.
If he still doesn't get back into the test team, that would be downright criminal by the revolutionary.

Yes today wasn't a good day, Run out when he got set wasn't the best way to go, but we all know that his chances were anyway slim to get into the ODI team.
If he still doesn't get back into the test team, that would be downright criminal by the revolutionary.

There is no room for him in ODIs. In Tests, he could get a recall or he may lose out to younger players like Haris and Amin. Nonetheless, the next few months will decide if Fawad is correct in his assessment or not.